Systematic review and quality evaluation of published human ingestion-time trials of blood pressure-lowering medications and their combinations

Clinical trial design for assessing hypertension medications: are critical circadian chronopharmacological principles being taking into account?

INTRODUCTION

Clinical hypertension trials typically rely on homeostatic principles, including single time-of-day office blood pressure (BP) measurements (OBPM), rather than circadian chronopharmacological principles, including ambulatory monitoring (ABPM) done around-the-clock to derive the asleep systolic BP (SBP) mean and sleep-time relative SBP decline - jointly the strongest prognosticators of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and true definition of hypertension - to qualify participants and assess outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

Eight chronopharmacological elements are indispensable for design and conduct of hypertension medication trials, mainly those on ingestion-time differences in effects, and also a means of rating quality of investigations. Accordingly, we highlight the findings and shortcomings of: (i) 155 such ingestion-time trials, 83.9% finding at-bedtime/evening treatment more beneficial than conventional upon-awakening/morning treatment; (ii) HOPE and ONTARGET CVD outcomes investigations assessing in the former add-on ramipril at-bedtime and in the latter telmisartan, ramipril, or both in combination in the morning; and (iii) pragmatic TIME CVD outcomes trial.

EXPERT OPINION

Failure to incorporate chronopharmacological principals - including ABPM to derive asleep SBP and SBP dipping to qualify subjects as hypertensive and assess CVD risk - results in deficient study design, dubious findings, and unnecessary medical controversy at the expense of advances in patient care.

Critical appraisal of recent translational chronopharmacology and chronotherapeutic reviews, meta-analyses, and pragmatic patient trials discloses significant deficiencies of design and conduct and suspect findings

The conduct of molecular and laboratory animal circadian rhythm research has increased exponentially in the past few decades, such that today investigations are being performed by scientists of many diverse disciplines. Knowledge gained from past works is now being explored for translational applications to clinical medicine, often termed "circadian medicine," through the implementation of patient trials. However, these trials are being led, more often than not, by investigators who have little or no formal training and in-depth expertise in the methods of human circadian rhythm research, causing them to be deficient in design and produce dubious findings that have already led to unnecessary medical controversy at the expense of advances in patient care. Evidence of the very significant shortcomings of today's translational circadian medicine research is exemplified in two recent publications in well-read reputable medical journals concerning the chronotherapy of blood pressure (BP) medications: one a review and meta-analysis by Maqsood et al. published in the journal Hypertension in 2023 that pertains to ingestion-time differences in the extent of BP reduction exerted by hypertensive medications and the other a report by Mackenzie et al. in the journal Lancet in 2022 that details the results of the pragmatic TIME study that assessed ingestion-time differences in cardiovascular disease outcomes. Herein, we appraise the inaccurate trial selection, lack of quality assessment, and the numerous other shortcomings that culminated in suspect findings and faulty conclusions of the former, as well as the deficiencies in design and conduct of the latter using as reference the eight items identified in 2021 by a working committee of the International Society for Chronobiology and American Association for Medical Chronobiology and Chronotherapeutics as being necessary for high-quality research of circadian rhythm-dependencies of the therapeutic effects of BP-lowering medications. The TIME study when rated for its quality according to the extent to which its investigational methods satisfy all of the eight recommended items attains a very low overall score of + 1 out of a possible range of -1 to + 7. Moreover, our review of the methods of the currently ongoing pragmatic BedMed trial discloses major deficiencies of the same sort rending a poor quality score of + 0.5. Although the focus of this article is the appraisal of the quality of contemporary circadian medicine hypertension chronotherapy research, it additionally exposes the inadequacies and dubious quality of the critique of such manuscripts submitted for publication to influential journals, in that some peer reviewers might also be deficient in the knowledge required to properly rate their merit.

Insight on Cardiac Chronobiology and Latest Developments of Chronotherapeutic Antihypertensive Interventions for Better Clinical Outcomes

Cardiac circadian rhythms are an important regulator of body functions, including cardiac activities and blood pressure. Disturbance of circadian rhythm is known to trigger and aggravate various cardiovascular diseases. Thus, modulating the circadian rhythm can be used as a therapeutic approach to cardiovascular diseases. Through this work, we intend to discuss the current understanding of cardiac circadian rhythms, in terms of quantifiable parameters like BP and HR. We also elaborate on the molecular regulators and the molecular cascades along with their specific genetic aspects involved in modulating circadian rhythms, with specific reference to cardiovascular health and cardiovascular diseases. Along with this, we also presented the latest pharmacogenomic and metabolomics markers involved in chronobiological control of the cardiovascular system along with their possible utility in cardiovascular disease diagnosis and therapeutics. Finally, we reviewed the current expert opinions on chronotherapeutic approaches for utilizing the conventional as well as the new pharmacological molecules for antihypertensive chronotherapy.

Circadian rhythms of risk factors and management in atherosclerotic and hypertensive vascular disease: Modern chronobiological perspectives of an ancient disease

Atherosclerosis, a chronic inflammatory disease of the arteries that appears to have been as prevalent in ancient as in modern civilizations, is predisposing to life-threatening and life-ending cardiac and vascular complications, such as myocardial and cerebral infarctions. The pathogenesis of atherosclerosis involves intima plaque buildup caused by vascular endothelial dysfunction, cholesterol deposition, smooth muscle proliferation, inflammatory cell infiltration and connective tissue accumulation. Hypertension is an independent and controllable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Conversely, atherosclerosis hardens the arterial wall and raises arterial blood pressure. Many CVD patients experience both atherosclerosis and hypertension and are prescribed medications to concurrently mitigate the two disease conditions. A substantial number of publications document that many pathophysiological changes caused by atherosclerosis and hypertension occur in a manner dependent upon circadian clocks or clock gene products. This article reviews progress in the research of circadian regulation of vascular cell function, inflammation, hemostasis and atherothrombosis. In particular, it delineates the relationship of circadian organization with signal transduction and activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system as well as disturbance of the sleep/wake circadian rhythm, as exemplified by shift work, metabolic syndromes and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), as promoters and mechanisms of atherogenesis and risk for non-fatal and fatal CVD outcomes. This article additionally updates advances in the clinical management of key biological processes of atherosclerosis to optimally achieve suppression of atherogenesis through chronotherapeutic control of atherogenic/hypertensive pathological sequelae.

Ingestion-time differences in the pharmacodynamics of dual-combination hypertension therapies: Systematic review and meta-analysis of published human trials

The pharmacodynamics of hypertension medications can be significantly affected by circadian rhythms in the biological mechanisms of the 24 h blood pressure (BP) pattern. Hypertension guidelines fail to recommend the time of day when patients, including those who require treatment with multiple medications, are to ingest BP-lowering therapy. We conducted a systematic review of published prospective trials that investigated hypertension medications for ingestion-time differences in BP-lowering, safety, patient adherence, and markers of target organ pathology. Among the search-retried 155 trials, 17 published between 1991 and 2020 totaling 1,508 hypertensive participants concerned the differential ingestion-time dependent effects of 14 unique dual-combination therapies. All but one (94.1%) of the trials, involving 98.5% of the total number of investigated individuals, reported clinically and statistically significant benefits - including enhanced reduction of asleep BP without induction of sleep-time hypotension, reduced prevalence of BP non-dipping, decreased adverse effects, improved kidney function, and reduced cardiac pathology - when dual-combination hypertension medications were ingested at-bedtime/evening rather than upon-waking/morning. A systematic and comprehensive review of the literature published in the past three decades reveals no single dual-combination hypertension trial reported significantly better benefit of the still conventional, yet unjustified by medical evidence, upon-waking/morning hypertension treatment scheme.

Elevated asleep blood pressure and non-dipper 24h patterning best predict risk for heart failure that can be averted by bedtime hypertension chronotherapy: A review of the published literature

Several prospective studies consistently report elevated asleep blood pressure (BP) and blunted sleep-time relative systolic BP (SBP) decline (non-dipping) are jointly the most significant prognostic markers of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, including heart failure (HF); therefore, they, rather than office BP measurements (OBPM) and ambulatory awake and 24 h BP means, seemingly are the most worthy therapeutic targets for prevention. Published studies of the 24 h BP pattern in HF are sparse in number and of limited sample size. They report high prevalence of the abnormal non-dipper/riser 24 h SBP patterning. Despite the established clinical relevance of the asleep BP, past as do present hypertension guidelines recommend the diagnosis of hypertension rely on OBPM and, when around-the-clock ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) is conducted to confirm the elevated OBPM, either on the derived 24 h or "daytime" BP means. Additionally, hypertension guidelines do not advise the time-of-day when BP-lowering medications should be ingested, in spite of known ingestion-time differences in their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Between 1976 and 2020, 155 unique trials of ingestion-time differences in the effects of 37 different single and 14 dual-combination hypertension medications, collectively involving 23,972 patients, were published. The vast majority (83.9%) of them found the at-bedtime/evening in comparison to upon-waking/morning treatment schedule resulted in more greatly enhanced: (i) reduction of asleep BP mean without induced sleep-time hypotension; (ii) reduction of the prevalence of the higher CVD risk non-dipper/riser 24 h BP phenotypes; (iii) improvement of kidney function, reduction of cardiac pathology, and with lower incidence of adverse effects. Most notably, no single published randomized trial found significantly better BP-lowering, particularly during sleep, or medical benefits of the most popular upon-waking/morning hypertension treatment-time scheme. Additionally, prospective outcome trials have substantiated that the bedtime relative to the upon-waking, ingestion of BP-lowering medications not only significantly reduces risk of HF but also improves overall CVD event-free survival time.